Born Pupils? Natural Pedagogy and Cultural Pedagogy

Abstract

The theory of natural pedagogy is an important focus of research on the evolution and development of cultural learning. It proposes that we are born pupils; that human children genetically inherit a package of psychological adaptations that make them receptive to teaching. In this article, I first examine the components of the package-eye contact, contingencies, infant-directed speech, gaze cuing, and rational imitation-asking in each case whether current evidence indicates that the component is a reliable feature of infant behavior and a genetic adaptation for teaching. I then discuss three fundamental insights embodied in the theory: Imitation is not enough for cumulative cultural inheritance, the extra comes from blind trust, and tweaking is a powerful source of cognitive change. Combining the results of the empirical review with these insights, I argue that human receptivity to teaching is founded on nonspecific genetic adaptations for social bonding and social learning and acquires its species- and functionally specific features through the operation of domain-general processes of learning in sociocultural contexts. We engage, not in natural pedagogy, but in cultural pedagogy.

The Developmental Origins of Gaze‐Following in Human Infants

“…However, this claim has been questioned in several studies (de Bordes, Cox, Hasselman, & Cillessen, 2013;Gredeb€ ack, Astor, & Fawcett, 2018;Szufnarowska et al, THE ORIGINS OF GAZE-FOLLOWING 2014) demonstrating GF following after non-ostensive cues (Szufnarowska et al, 2014), and in the absence of any attempt to communicate or draw infant's attention to the actor shifting gaze (Gredeb€ ack et al, 2018) at the age most relevant to the Natural Pedagogy theory-6 months. Furthermore, the receptivity of infants to the gaze of adults might serve other important functions apart from transmission of knowledge, such as social bonding (Heyes, 2016). Second, several examples indicate that the coordination of attention and the transmission of knowledge can occur without GF, for example, cultural contexts in which infants are held on the laps or backs of caregivers, when infants have to naturally rely on postural cues (Akhtar & Gernsbacher, 2008), and deaf and blind dyads in which caregivers mostly communicate through physical contact (e.g., deaf parents use "tapping" on the infants body as an ostensive cue; Akhtar & Gernsbacher, 2008).…”

Mutual Gaze During Early Mother–Infant Interactions Promotes Attention Control Development

“…Looking at each other's face or mutual gaze (MG) is an important mode of communication in parent–infant interactions (e.g., Lavelli & Fogel, ; Tronick, ). From birth, MG serves crucial communicative (Csibra & Gergely, , ) and affiliative functions (Heyes, ). It informs about another person's attention directed to self (Reddy, ), signals communicative intent (Senju & Csibra, ), provides means of sharing positive affect (Feldman, ), and helps to regulate infant's emotions in moments of distress (MacLean et al., ).…”

When does social learning become cultural learning?

“…It does not say anything about why this relationship holds; about what goes on in the observer's mind or brain that makes him or her perform actions with a similar effect on the objects. Other putative mechanisms which are sometimes mentioned in connection with selective social learning are theory of mind, shared intentionality (Tomasello, ) and natural pedagogy (Csibra & Gergely, ; Heyes, in press). In the future, research on these topics may well provide domain‐specific hypotheses that can be tested against the kind of domain‐general hypotheses highlighted in this article.…”